I wouldn't call it a bad idea, but I don't know if it's really necessary. If this happened (and roster limits stayed the same), fewer kids would have the opportunity to play, right? Or is my logic off on that?

It would depend on another factor, if the NCAA (or Power 5) changes the participation rule so that more than 65(?) can play in any given game. If that rule remains in force, then the 5 year eligibility is sort of moot.

Jimbo is in favor of teams playing FCS opponents, and it would be in these games you could let everyone play and get more experience in a game situation. Should they lose as year of eligibility to play in these types of games? Or in games where there are substantial blowouts. His philosophy is to pull starters early to avoid injury and allow for experience for all. When games get out of hand or an injury happens to a backup that could force a RS to play meaningless snaps, should they lose eligibility for it?

Myself I would waive the participation rules for FBS/FCS games altogether and not hold an appearance in that game against the current eligibility rule. From there a rule where a player can enter a game without losing eligibility if playing while there is more than a 35 point difference in score (winning or losing). Or just waive the rule entirely upon the realization these would likely be the only times these last 20 scholarship players and walkons would really be playing at all.

Or just eliminate playing FCS teams counting as a regular game. There's literally zero point in including them as a meaningful game. If you want a tune-up game that badly, schools should be allowed to schedule exhibitions against whoever they want and in any format they want before week 1.

Or just eliminate playing FCS teams counting as a regular game. There's literally zero point in including them as a meaningful game. If you want a tune-up game that badly, schools should be allowed to schedule exhibitions against whoever they want and in any format they want before week 1.

Or we can live in the real world where these games are a necessity for FCS teams to fund their athletic departments and leave them as is. The B1G rule against them is ridiculous in light of how little difference there is between FCS teams and MAC teams.

Or we can live in the real world where these games are a necessity for FCS teams to fund their athletic departments and leave them as is. The B1G rule against them is ridiculous in light of how little difference there is between FCS teams and MAC teams.

Oh stop. Quit acting like all these teams (Big Ten included) are on some moral high ground and scheduling FCS teams solely to help fund their athletic departments.

If there's such a little difference, then why not schedule a MAC team or a Sunbelt team instead?

I understand it is financially beneficial to the FCS schools, and would never argue against that. But the reasoning behind it is that it does very little for a football team competition wise that a glorified scrimmage wouldn't do.

Oh stop. Quit acting like all these teams (Big Ten included) are on some moral high ground and scheduling FCS teams solely to help fund their athletic departments.

If there's such a little difference, then why not schedule a MAC team or a Sunbelt team instead?

I understand it is financially beneficial to the FCS schools, and would never argue against that. But the reasoning behind it is that it does very little for a football team competition wise that a glorified scrimmage wouldn't do.

If there is no difference in playing FCS, MAC, or Sun Belt teams (and honestly there isn't unless we're talking the occasional fluke Top 25 team), why limit who you can schedule against? By limiting the supply of opponents it will only serve to up the prices MAC or Sun Belt teams will charge to play. Whereas this is a small boom for those teams, it is financially devastating to the smaller schools. Is it pure altruism to schedule FCS opponents, absolutely not. But in the end it serves a genuinely altruistic purpose and helps provide opportunities for MORE athletes to play college sports. Because the reality is many schools would drop programs at lower levels without that yearly (or bi-yearly) payday.

Oh, I completely understand and I don't want the smaller schools to have to drop programs. My argument is that it is dumb that teams are allowed to buy wins that actually count toward something. What's the point of expanding a schedule to 12 games if only 11 are real competition?

Oh right, you get more money and it has nothing to do with actually football reasons.

Dan Patrick reporting that he spoke with a USC higher up that said talks being finalized about USC vs Bama at Cowboys stadium to kick off 2016.

Love the idea, but might be a year early in the terms of depth for USC...but still psyched if true.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49erNation85

I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

Dan Patrick reporting that he spoke with a USC higher up that said talks being finalized about USC vs Bama at Cowboys stadium to kick off 2016.

Love the idea, but might be a year early in the terms of depth for USC...but still psyched if true.

Too bad Nelson Agholor will not be in attendance

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeJoeBrown
The most important thing, however, is how strong their swagger factors are.
Newton
South of the Mason Dixon +10 swagger
Barely literate +5 swagger
Thief +15 swagger
Kicked off of a team of thugs +20 swagger
Big, average speed -3 swagger
Hasn't done jacksquat on the field +15 swagger
Total Swagger: 62ATL College Park Zone 3* +20 swagger Bonus pts

Because of the eight-game league schedule, non-primary crossover rivals in the Atlantic and Coastal divisions may wind up playing each other only once in an 11-year span. This prompted discussion at the spring meetings about scheduling fellow ACC teams as nonconference opponents in future seasons. Some possible future ACC "nonconference" games could pit Miami against Syracuse, Duke against NC State, and Clemson against Virginia.

ACC just proving that they don't know how to math real good and didn't fully think through randomly adding schools.

Oh what's that, you only have 12 TOTAL games in a season and the more teams you add to the conference, the less often each team will get to play eachother? You don't say.......

Yeah it is a bummer, hes next in line to become an All-American at USC. Being alongside Lee and Woods for his first two years has pushed him to be very good. Will have JuJu and Adoree possibly out there, though.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49erNation85

I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

Awesome, the Big Ten is dumb as well. Let's expand our conference just to say we have teams in it, and then not play eachother in games that count in said conference.

Money ruins absolutely everything. I'm getting to a point where I wish there was minor league football just so I don't have to deal with all this stupidity. I used to love college football, but now I'm just getting tired of it all.

Yeah it is a bummer, hes next in line to become an All-American at USC. Being alongside Lee and Woods for his first two years has pushed him to be very good. Will have JuJu and Adoree possibly out there, though.

How is George Farmer's progression coming along WR or back to RB again?

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeJoeBrown
The most important thing, however, is how strong their swagger factors are.
Newton
South of the Mason Dixon +10 swagger
Barely literate +5 swagger
Thief +15 swagger
Kicked off of a team of thugs +20 swagger
Big, average speed -3 swagger
Hasn't done jacksquat on the field +15 swagger
Total Swagger: 62ATL College Park Zone 3* +20 swagger Bonus pts

How is George Farmer's progression coming along WR or back to RB again?

He is looking healthy, very determined I guess coming off of the torn ACL. He is at WR and they are no longer doing the RB thing that they tried his true freshman year. It was a bummer because that was nothing but a waste of his RS. They got him like 10 plays that year after sitting out half of the year.

Him and Steven Mitchell both look to have huge years after missing last year with torn ACL's. Mitchell was going to blow up as a true freshman, his playmaking ability is scary. Farmer was actually looking to start outside with Agholar, but Rogers beat him out.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49erNation85

I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

He is looking healthy, very determined I guess coming off of the torn ACL. He is at WR and they are no longer doing the RB thing that they tried his true freshman year. It was a bummer because that was nothing but a waste of his RS. They got him like 10 plays that year after sitting out half of the year.

Him and Steven Mitchell both look to have huge years after missing last year with torn ACL's. Mitchell was going to blow up as a true freshman, his playmaking ability is scary. Farmer was actually looking to start outside with Agholar, but Rogers beat him out.

Hopefully we will restore himself to become a draftable prospect. I really did expect him to at least be in the same breath as Lee leaving USC.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeJoeBrown
The most important thing, however, is how strong their swagger factors are.
Newton
South of the Mason Dixon +10 swagger
Barely literate +5 swagger
Thief +15 swagger
Kicked off of a team of thugs +20 swagger
Big, average speed -3 swagger
Hasn't done jacksquat on the field +15 swagger
Total Swagger: 62ATL College Park Zone 3* +20 swagger Bonus pts

Hopefully we will restore himself to become a draftable prospect. I really did expect him to at least be in the same breath as Lee leaving USC.

Farmer was the #1 WR recruit in the country coming in, Lee was being recruited by most as a safety.

The Serra coach said Lee was all set to go to Oregon, but decided on USC last minute because he wanted to prove he was better than Farmer.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49erNation85

I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

Farmer was the #1 WR recruit in the country coming in, Lee was being recruited by most as a safety.

The Serra coach said Lee was all set to go to Oregon, but decided on USC last minute because he wanted to prove he was better than Farmer.

That's my point. Now I ask does Farmer's work ethic go into questioning or was Lee really that determined?

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeJoeBrown
The most important thing, however, is how strong their swagger factors are.
Newton
South of the Mason Dixon +10 swagger
Barely literate +5 swagger
Thief +15 swagger
Kicked off of a team of thugs +20 swagger
Big, average speed -3 swagger
Hasn't done jacksquat on the field +15 swagger
Total Swagger: 62ATL College Park Zone 3* +20 swagger Bonus pts

That's my point. Now I ask does Farmer's work ethic go into questioning or was Lee really that determined?

I had never heard of Farmer's work ethic being a problem...I know he dealt with bum hamstrings and durability questions....and the ACL doesn't hurt that. I think the mix of Lee playing with a chip on his shoulder and being a little underrated went a longways as well.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49erNation85

I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

I think it's more losing that extra day of practice than the 2 hours that will have an effect over the course of the season. Especially considering the high amount of roster turnover they're experiencing in 2014.

I think it's more losing that extra day of practice than the 2 hours that will have an effect over the course of the season. Especially considering the high amount of roster turnover they're experiencing in 2014.

Do they actually have to skip a day? When I read "equivalent of one practice day per week" I assumed they could just cut practices shorter each day to add up to 2 hours.

Do they actually have to skip a day? When I read "equivalent of one practice day per week" I assumed they could just cut practices shorter each day to add up to 2 hours.

What I read is they lose 1 day but only 2 hours. Meaning they now have 4 days for 18 hours (NCAA rules 1 day off plus gameday) versus 5 days for 20 hours. So in reality their time commitment goes up to 4.5 hours per day from 4 hours per day.

Conventional wisdom says they'll lose the Friday walk through practice session, so really not that much.

Originally they were going to be reduced to 16 hours, but the NCAA awarded 2 back for their educational improvement.